some questions
How is it possible to introduce playfulness and expressive com- munity gestures in a budget tight school building? By realizing and understanding limited opportunities to make architec- ture. Every project in our office, whether it be a bathroom renovation for a government office building or new correctional facility provides an opportunity for a focused effort that goes beyond simple problem solving. The Mayo Replacement School is a building of simple forms, materials and construction detailing. However, in key areas: the assem- bly area, gymnasium, specific classrooms and main entry/exits, arose an opportunity to explore ideas of community significance, visibility, entry, materiality, education and whimsy. We conserve and are efficient in many areas of the school building to spend what is saved in other key areas. Simple pre-engineered wood trusses throughout the school facilitate an expressive learning tree structure of logs in the main assembly area; a concealed and inexpensive roof structure throughout the classroom areas facilitates an exposed and interesting custom wood/steel truss in the gymnasium. It is a balancing act of sorts.
Is this a green building? I would argue that it is not as green as it could be. It is a great sustainable leap when compared to existing facilities throughout the Yukon, however, we have a long way to go. We would have liked to introduce grey and black water recycling, explored the possibilities of including a living green roof, introduced solar hot water, solar wall and photovoltaic components, reduced or eliminated on site parking and reviewed extensively wood fram- ing methods and details toward future dismantling and recycling of the school building. However, the short life span of elected officials and the bureaucracy surrounding the funding of public projects means little or no consideration of building life cycle costs. Thus capital budgets are limited and so too are options for implementation of green measures with a longer than aver- age payback period. Does it bring us closer to a sustainable architecture, society and way of living? I struggle with this everyday I sit at my desk. We are but part of a bigger web of decisions, motives and actions. However, as architects and more importantly as individuals we are obli- gated to scrutinize our own decisions and actions. I may have accepted after a lengthy discussion with government officials to expand the already large school parking area by cutting down an additional 4m x 40m wide strip of mature boreal forest, but at least there was an understanding that something valuable was being lost in return. I walk and ride my bike rather than drive a car. We should lead by example whenever possible even if it means a little inconvenience and, at times, heated debate. Why is it so difficult to convince government and private clients to implement simple yet significant ‘green features’ in buildings? Cost (up front as opposed to long term), short term goals and returns, continued availability of cheap carbon based energy, the status quo factor.
Kobayashi + Zedda practice in Whitehorse,Yukon. They recently returned from a research trip to Scandinavia to see how other places build north of 60.
ON SITE review 6: BEAUTY
17
Made with FlippingBook interactive PDF creator